CULTURE NEWS

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Pursuing profit and political correctness, more hospitals across America, including Cleveland Clinic and Johns Hopkins, are offering "sex change" transgender surgery despite a lack of medical/psychiatric/scientific evidence that such procedures help sexually-confused people.

“There’s much greater buy-in [for transgender surgeries] in the conventional medical community than there ever was before.”-- Dr. Joshua Safer, Director of the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery, at Boston Medical Center

“Phalloplasty [false penis] surgeries are more complex than vaginoplasty [false vagina surgeries] and complications aren’t unusual. Most of the cost is increasingly covered by insurance and can range from $50,000 to $125,000, experts say.”-- Wall Street Journal

“To change somebody’s life in a few hours is really rewarding.” [$$$]-- Rachel Bluebond-Langner, Assistant Professor of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine

. . . Other medical centers also have begun offering transgender surgeries, including Boston Medical Center, Oregon Health & Science University in Portland and Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. . . . Previously, patients wanting transgender surgeries had to seek them out through private-practice plastic surgeons or in countries such as Thailand.

Research on the surgeries is mixed. Critics point to a 2011 study published in the online journal PLOS One by researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden that followed more than 300 transgender people after surgery and found they had a higher rate of psychiatric care, suicide and mortality than a control group. . . .

Johns Hopkins Children’s Center physicians helped lead an American Academy of Pediatrics committee that authored the 2013 policy statement that supports access to clinically and culturally competent health care for all LGBT and questioning youth.

. . . We have committed to and will soon begin providing gender-affirming surgery as another important element of our overall care program, reflecting careful consideration over the past year of best practices and the appropriate provision of care for transgender individuals.

With a shift in the cultural paradigm, transgender rights are slowly being accommodated. . . . Not surprisingly, political, academic, and judicial activism has advanced a new confrontational liberal zeitgeist that has made it difficult to have a dissenting opinion for fear of being maliciously labelled. . . .

Prominent businesses are boycotting states, such as Georgia, Indiana, and North Carolina that uphold the Religious Freedom Restoration Act [RFRA] that is arguably discriminatory and unconstitutional.

In the article, “Seeing through the intersex confusion,” he acknowledged that confounding physiological (hormonal) triggers and cultural forces lead to psychological discordance.

Comparing somatic disorders to other developmental disorders that should never “be subjected to bias or mistreatment”, he argued that “while a newborn’s ‘intrinsic maleness’ or ‘intrinsic femaleness’ may be difficult to access in certain more complicated intersex cases, the point remains that there is an ‘underlying’ sexual constitution that we must do our best to recognise and respect and act in accord with”.

Equally important is his far-reaching assertion that “willfully (denying this reality) is a prescription for disillusionment and dishonesty”.

In a recent Sun op-ed, colleagues at the Bloomberg School of Public Health sought to "disassociate" themselves from a paper we published in The New Atlantis entitled "Sexuality and Gender." Our paper explored, and found flimsy, any scientific support for popular notions about sexual orientation and gender. . . . Our paper entailed a careful study and full description of close to 200 scientific papers.

We did say that scientific studies did not now support (though could not categorically reject) the view that sexual orientation or gender identity is an "innate" bio-behavioral feature of human beings, fixed at conception and rigidly defining sexual desires, attractions and identities throughout life — i.e. the claim that gay people are "born that way." We also said studies of gay, lesbian and transgender populations revealed among them a considerable increase in mental distress and disorder up to and including suicide. And, we noted, science declares that there are only two human sexes, so that thoughts such as "I'm a woman in a man's body" did not describe a biological reality even though it might be a powerful feeling or assumption of a person and could take myriad forms. Follow up of children with such feelings demonstrated that the great majority — 80 to 95 percent — abandon them as they mature.

Our colleagues did not offer any specific scientific study that refuted what we demonstrated. . . .

Friday, September 09, 2016

Several families have filed a federal lawsuit against numerous Obama administration officials and the Virginia (Minnesota) School District for permitting a sexually confused boy to confront half-naked girls in their locker rooms. After the girls and their parents complained, the school suggested they use a private room, but the boy follows them there repeatedly and harasses them by raising his dress and otherwise exposing himself.

"No student should be forced to use private facilities at school, like locker rooms and restrooms, with students of the opposite sex. No government agency should hold hostage important education funding to advance an unlawful agenda."

Alliance Defending Freedom [ADF] is fighting a Virginia, Minnesota school district. The conservative group filed a lawsuit on the behalf of 11 families who want to stop the allowance of the opposite sex in their children’s locker rooms, Fox News reports. The lawsuit named Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Virginia School District #706, and Secretary of Education John King Jr. as defendants.

The lawsuit filed said that a transgender student, only identified as Student X, used the female locker rooms and restrooms and participated on girl athletic teams. The ADF said that Student X violated some girls by twerking in their presence, dancing to suggestive songs, and making jokes about a girl’s bra size.

According to the lawsuit, girls who were uncomfortable with Student X were told they could use another locker room. One student, called Plaintiff A, said that she was told she could change in an empty boy’s locker room but Student X followed her in there. Plaintiff A said there was nowhere to go for privacy.

The ADF lawsuit explains that the [federal] DOE and DOJ are unlawfully redefining the terms of Title IX, something that only Congress can alter, and are illegitimately forcing their political will on all public schools across the nation. As the lawsuit points out, no federal law requires schools to allow boys into girls’ locker rooms or girls into boys’ locker rooms, and other courts have rejected the agencies’ interpretation to the contrary. The lawsuit also explains that the DOE did not comply with key provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act when it adopted its rules.

The complaint explains some of the real concerns of students and parents, such as when a biologically male student who identifies as a female—and who is allowed to enter the girls’ locker room under the district’s policy—went on to dance in the locker room “in a sexually explicit manner—‘twerking,’ ‘grinding’ and dancing like he was on a ‘stripper pole’ to songs with explicit lyrics, including ‘Milkshake’ by Kelis. On another occasion, a female student saw the male student lift his dress to reveal his underwear while ‘grinding’ to the music.”

"What these girls are asking for is something that for all of American history has been the common-sense presumption, that you have facilities for girls, facilities for boys and any student that is uncomfortable with that — including the transgender student at the heart of this case, (who) they're not uncompassionate to — they would think the best thing would be for this student to have the option to use the ... restroom of (the student's) biological sex or to make one of the single-stall restrooms available for (the student) to use," said Matt Sharp, an attorney with the Arizona-based Alliance Defending Freedom, a religious legal advocacy nonprofit group.

The lawsuit seeks to have the district's policy and the federal guidance declared unlawful, and a permanent injunction issued against both. It also seeks "an award of nominal damages in the amount of one dollar, and compensatory damages" for each plaintiff, along with legal fees.

Virginia Superintendent Noel Schmidt declined to comment Thursday, and the school district's attorney, John Colosimo, couldn't be reached for comment.

Monday, September 05, 2016

Gay/Transgender Agenda advocates advancing the government-backed "Safe Schools" program are heralding "transgender" preschoolers who choose sexual mutilation surgery prior to kindergarten as well as their doctors who perform the procedures in Australia.

“We have a number of students who are going through gender transition in our schools, with the youngest being a four-year-old at the moment.”-- Gregory Prior, Deputy Secretary of School Operations, New South Wales (NSW) Department of Education

While the child is the youngest on Australian record to to change their gender, the New South Wales government has revealed "hundreds" of other children are being referred to the state's hospitals for gender dysphoria.

The four-year-old is reportedly being supported throughout the transition by the education department, and is part of the Safe Schools program.

According to News Corp, data from the Westmead Children Hospital stated that referrals for gender dysphoria have tripled.

The report said another major hospital in Melbourne had 250 children who were being assisted by the gender dysphoria unit. A decade ago it had just one.

[Some psychologists] maintain pre-school children are still at a very early stage of their development for such a major decision to be made. . . . The youngest child involved is just three years of age.

Transgender advocate and Australian of the Year finalist Catherine McGregor advised caution and said proper checks needed to be in place to ensure premature mistakes were not made.

“In my experience, kids with strong cross-gender identification tend to get it right.

"However, I can understand there would be caution on the part of the department and medical practitioners on making any irreversible decisions at that stage.”

Prominent transgender advocate Catherine McGregor has been sacked from a high-profile role with human rights group Kaleidoscope Australia for speaking out against the controversial Safe Schools program.

Writing for Sydney’s The Daily Telegraph in May, Ms McGregor argued the program had been compromised by radical left-wing politics and was not the most effective way of supporting transgender children. She claimed the program might lead transgender youth down a “blind alley”.

Ms McGregor, who was the world’s highest-ranking transgender military official and an Australian of the Year nominee, told The Australian she was disappointed by the reaction to her comments. It had cost her at least one speaking engagement. A Melbourne charity advised that it no longer wanted her to appear at an LGBTI event because it feared a hostile reaction.

“I’ve always been very happy to support various causes within the LGBTI community because I truly believe that, as a transgender woman who has been able to achieve a lot in my career in the military and as a writer and broadcaster, that I can contribute a lot,” Ms McGregor said.

“But it’s quite obvious that my views are more conservative than sections of the LGBTI community are happy to accept. I’ve really just had enough.”

Wednesday, August 31, 2016

Officials at Clemson University have confirmed that ordinary Christians are forbidden to exercise their First Amendment right to assemble on campus in discreet prayer unless they first obtain a permit, which then restricts them to a "designated free speech zone."

“. . . referring to a silent offer to pray as ‘solicitation’ is not fair. It’s a very different circumstance than someone coming on campus to solicit, say, a new textbook to students without permission.”-- Emily Jashinsky, Young Americans for Freedom

Kyra Palange was walking across Clemson’s campus last Thursday afternoon when she saw a man sitting in a folding chair, with an empty chair sitting next to him.

The Clemson grad student walked closer to him and saw a sign on the empty chair that said “PRAYER,” according to the Young America’s Foundation [YAF].

“I approached him and we sat down to pray for a few minutes,” Palange told Young America’s Foundation. “When we finished, a man from the university approached us and said he could not be praying there because it was not a ‘designated free speech area’ and presented the person who was praying with a form for the procedures for applying for ‘solicitation’ on campus. He told him he had to leave.”

Palange captured part of the interaction on video. In it, a Clemson University official identified as Shawn Jones confirms to Palange that the entire campus is not a “free speech area.”

The school is defending [Shawn Jones], arguing it would actually have violated the Constitution to not stop the man’s prayer.

“With him not being a student or faculty or staff, he has to go through the proper procedures in order to [do this] … this is not a designated free speech area,” Jones says in the video.

The praying man, [Clemson spokesman Mark] Land said, was not affiliated with a campus group, and he was allegedly soliciting because he had put up a sign inviting passersby to join him in prayer. Land also argued that the school’s action was directly in accordance with the Constitution, because the school was not giving the man a special exception from school policy because of the content of his speech.

. . . Clemson has been accused of having overly restrictive free speech policies. The school has a Red Light rating (the lowest) from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which rates schools on their free speech policies.

WeRoar Clemson, a group of students dedicated to fighting for First Amendment rights on campus, has identified the man as a well-known local “who prays with students in the community.”

“Free Speech zones were ended at Clemson in 2006 for students, but this policy remains in effect for non-students,” the group stated on Facebook. “Clemson University is a public university that receives taxpayer funds, therefore it must comply fully with the law of the land, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Clemson has failed its duty to uphold constitutional liberty.”

Saturday, August 27, 2016

A Congressional committee is recommending criminal charges against the University of New Mexico (UNM) for illegally handling aborted babies after learning that the medical school instructed high school students in dissection of fetal brains at a summer camp.

“Documentation obtained by the panel in the course of its investigation reflects that the transfer of fetal tissue from SWWO to UNM for research purposes is a direct violation of New Mexico’s Jonathan Spradling Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act.”-- Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Chair of the U.S. House Select Panel on Infant Lives

Paul Roth, the dean of the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, can be seen admitting to the allegation in [the above] video published this month by the New Mexico Alliance for Life.

Roth would not elaborate about the source of the aborted baby brains or the way in which the taxpayer-funded university obtained them to be sliced up by high school kids on the summer learning adventure.

[Congresswoman Marsha] Blackburn charged the school broke state laws governing the use of aborted fetal tissue it received from Southwestern Women’s Options [SWWO], which provides late-term abortions. Published reports said the tissue was used for research and even dissected at what has been described as summer camps in 2012 and 2014.

Blackburn told [New Mexico Attorney General Hector] Balderas that university officials trained new abortion doctors, referred women to outside abortion clinics, sent UNM faculty and residents to an abortion clinic during transition between owners, extended “voluntary faculty” status to local abortionists, supplied residents and fellows to perform abortions for SWWO, and put pressure on employees and students for political support, all in violation of state law..

Blackburn’s letter was accompanied by a scathing 291-page report outlining the relationship between UNM and SWWO and the use and advocacy of aborted tissues for research.

“Today, UNM Hospital performs surgical abortions for any reason through 25 weeks gestation,” said the report. “Since the time when opposition to participating in abortion procedures was the predominant view of UNM medical staff, the culture appears to have changed—along with the composition of UNM hospital and clinic personnel—to one aggressively in favor of the expansion of abortion.”

Earlier in June, the [House] panel sent evidence to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services indicating that Planned Parenthood and the human tissue procurement company StemExpress may have violated patients’ privacy under HIPPA.

[Paul Roth stated in the video,] "Yes, we had a faculty member who obtained some tissue, and during one of these summer workshops, uh, dissected I think one or two fetal brains."

Roth declined to confirm the source of the fetal brains when the questioner asked him “were those from Dr. Boyd’s?” The questioner is referring to the abortion facility operated by late-term abortionist, Curtis Boyd, who also teaches at the university’s medical school. . . .

Friday, August 26, 2016

The Virtual Infant Parenting program uses "robot babies" (designed to simulate and exaggerate the worst aspects of caring for newborn children) that are assigned to teenage girls to discourage pregnancy, but the largest study of its kind has determined that the program actually arouses desires for motherhood in young teenage girls.

"We never went into the study thinking this would increase teen pregnancy. . . . Unfortunately that's the finding."-- Sally Brinkman, University of Western Australia

Researchers found that girls between the ages of 13 and 15 who were given a simulator infant to look after were actually more likely to become pregnant early in life than those who had simple sex education.

Of those who had charge of a doll, 17 percent recorded at least one pregnancy -- whether carried to full term or terminated -- by the age of 20.

Of all the girls who fell pregnant, 53.8 percent of those who had the robot baby terminated the pregnancy compared with 60.1 percent in the control group.

The researchers said while that difference was not huge, it indicated participants who had exposure to the robot baby appeared more likely go through with the pregnancy.

Australian girls given a baby simulator for a weekend were 36 percent more likely to become pregnant during their teenage years, compared to girls in a control group who only received standard health education, researchers found.

Overall, the live birth rate was double for girls who participated in the infant simulator program -- 8 percent compared with 4 percent for the control group, researchers found.

The baby simulator program also appeared to convince girls to give birth rather than seek an abortion once they became pregnant, Brinkman said.

These results run counter to the intention of the program, which has been implemented in as many as 89 countries worldwide. It should make school districts think twice about employing baby simulators in their pregnancy prevention efforts, Brinkman said.

To help discourage teen pregnancy, many students in the Seattle area and nationally are given lifelike, robot babies that cry throughout the night. Unlike eggs or plants used to represent babies in some human-development classes, these dolls require feeding, burping and diaper changes. Like real infants, sometimes even that doesn’t stop their crying.

The Australia program was adapted from one in the United States, formerly known as “Baby Think It Over” and now called “RealCare Baby 3.” Along with Seattle, area schools districts that use RealCare Baby 3 include Highline, Everett and Kent.

The doll’s creator, Realityworks, says more than half the school districts in the [U.S.] have purchased its products.

The babies, which can run about $1,000 apiece, are programmed to cry, scream and sleep. Computers tucked within the dolls register when the babies are changed, burped, fed or — in instances where everything goes drastically wrong — when they “die.”

“We’ve had midnight telephone calls from parents saying: ‘Please tell me how to turn it off, my daughter’s going crazy,’” as Janette Collins, a London-based youth counselor said to the Financial Times last October. “It’s the very few girls who score really well that you have to look out for. In my experience they’re the ones who go off and get pregnant for real — you’ve accidentally taught them they can cope.”

“Anecdotally, a lot of the students really enjoyed the program,” study author Sally Brinkman, of Australia’s Telethon Kids Institute, told the Sydney Morning Herald. “There was a lot of positivity around the program, so it didn’t really work in putting the kids off.”

The gurgling dolls may have inadvertently made teen motherhood too appealing, with many students doting on their electronic progeny and enjoying the attention that came with it, the researchers said.

"We definitely were not saying you can't become a teenage mother. We didn't want to demonise that, but the intention was clearly behind the program to increase contraceptive use and if you were going to have a baby to do it in a healthy way, and part of doing it in a healthy way was to delay," [Dr. Brinkman] said.

"Evidence now suggests they do not have the desired long-term effect of reducing teenage pregnancy. These interventions are likely to be an ineffective use of public resources for pregnancy prevention," Dr Brinkman said.

The simulators were currently used by more than 40,000 institutions worldwide . . .

Friday, August 19, 2016

Statistics from President Obama's Social Security Administration show that the fastest-growing trend in naming newborns is gender-neutral first names, thus eliminating the need for future name changes once the child "decides its gender identity."

"Today’s parents have moved beyond the dichotomy of boy and girl names. They want their children to grow up and be themselves, free from stereotypes. Boys can wear nail polish, girls can ride skateboards. It’s all good."-- Linda Murray, Editor in Chief, BabyCenter (which declared 2015 “the year of the gender-neutral baby”)

"Think beyond the conventional choices. Any name not traditionally used for people (names of trees places, words and those that are invented) by definition transcend gender and can work equally well for girls or boys. There’s no reason that Arrow can’t be a girl’s name and Alaska a boy’s. . . . Feminism is cool again, gay marriage is the law of the land and transgender celebrities have come into the mainstream."-- Pamela Redmond Satran, baby-name expert

. . . At a time when Banana Republic has done away with pink and blue distinctions in a children’s line, some high schools have stopped using graduation gowns with different colors for boys and girls, and unisex is de rigueur in fashion, gender-blurring baby names are on the rise among American parents.

The numbers seem to bear this out. Researchers at Nameberry analyzed the baby name registry from the Social Security Administration and found that the number of babies given unisex names like Harper, Tatum and Quinn had risen 60 percent in the last decade, to 67,831 babies in 2015.

. . . in an era marked by Caitlyn Jenner’s endlessly publicized transition from Bruce, as well as gender-bending shows like Amazon’s “Transparent,” the unisex baby name may also prove to be in its infancy.

Nameberry, one of the top baby name destinations on the Internet for expecting parents, recently compiled a list of their top 50 baby names for 2016. . . . one of the top Nameberry observations was the surge in gender-neutral monikers.

. . . here are some of my personal favorites from Nameberry's ranking. Good for boys, good for girls, good for choose-whatever-word-you-like-because-gender-is-a-construct: Riley, Avery, Rowan, Finley, Peyton, Jude, Sage, Augustine, Arlo, Charlie.

When it comes to naming your kid these days, there really aren't any hard and fast rules — especially in regard to gender norms. The hottest names are actually being used for girls and boys. (Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds, who both have popular unisex names, are obviously the coolest parents for choosing to name their baby girl James.)

To read the entire article above, and see all 25 "Super-Cool" names, CLICK HERE.